Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6IS USM Lens

I'm wondering is this a decent lens? I'm looking for something under $600 cdn.
I would like a lens that has a good zoom for wildlife. Would this be good for far shots?

Or can you tell me of any other good zoom lenses in the $600 range?

I'm very new to all this so the help is greatly appreciated. Thanks so much

It's a well-regarded consumer lens. Canon's 55-250 is pretty equivalent (some debate which is better) for APS-C formats.

Tamron is releasing a 70-300 VC lens in the near future that is rumored to be very good (and cheaper). So far only the Nikon version is released.

You would really want something out to 400mm or longer if wildlife is your focus, but for your budget, you probably won't do any better than one of these.

Thanks for the info. The Canon 55-250 is priced pretty good. Would this be fairly good for far distances?

I'd love to get something 400mm or more but they are way to much for me
Thanks again

Capita wrote in post #10928499
I'm wondering is this a decent lens? I'm looking for something under $600 cdn.
I would like a lens that has a good zoom for wildlife. Would this be good for far shots?

Or can you tell me of any other good zoom lenses in the $600 range?

I'm very new to all this so the help is greatly appreciated. Thanks so much

I'd also suggest the 55-250 instead of the 70-300. It's a fraction of the price and is just as good in pretty much every respect. The difference in length amounts to a couple of steps forwards or backwards. Having owned both, I sold the 70-300 and kept the 55-250. Both are a bit short for wildlife, although with patience you can get good shots at backyard bird feeders and in zoos or animal sanctuaries.

The 55-250 performs very well - you're unlikely to be disappointed, especially as you'll have a few hundred dollars of your budget left over for something else ...!

Depends on what you mean by "far". I really recommend that you borrow or somehow check out a few lenses of different lengths before you buy. I had the 55-250, which is a VERY good deal, and I now use the 70-200 f/4 L IS (a fabulous lens, but not near your budget) with a 1.4x teleconverter when I need it, for a total of 280mm. Even on a crop sensor sensor camera (everything up to a 7D), which gives you more reach than a full frame, 280mm is not long enough for a some wildlife uses. E.g., I tried a bunch of loon shots a few weeks ago with that setup, and I could not get close enough. for larger animals you might make do, and for things that let you get closer. You need to see for yourself whether that focal length range will do for you.

If it will, the 55-250 is a great deal as a starter lens. It is very cheap, amazingly light, and has pretty good IQ.

get 70-300L IS and tell us how you like it.

Capita wrote in post #10928499
I'm wondering is this a decent lens?

At the very least, yes. The lens is far better than "decent."

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Thanks guys for all the info. I'm totally new to all of this so thanks for not being hard on me

i have the 70-300
Is has great IQ
But the reach even on a crop body may not be enough for Birds
the only issue i have with the lens is the speed of the AF motor (hard to track Bird and my 7D struggles)
I believe this is why canon went with the new 70-300L

I did not use the 55-250 but i am sure the AF speed is not better as it is not USM

omer wrote in post #10929343
i have the 70-300
Is has great IQ
But the reach even on a crop body may not be enough for Birds
the only issue i have with the lens is the speed of the AF motor (hard to track Bird and my 7D struggles)
I believe this is why canon went with the new 70-300L

I did not use the 55-250 but i am sure the AF speed is not better as it is not USM

I have to agree with this.

If it's small birds you are after, it's really hard to get close enough to fill the frame at 300mm, and this is where the lens gets a little soft.
I find the AF to be good. It's good enough to pan cars on the track doing 150mph.
The IS works quite nice, IMO.
And the macro capability is decent, and great to have, although the MFD is a tad long.

Sharpness between 70-200 is decent, but not up to the 70-200 series zooms.

I have no experience with the 55-250, but, on a crop, that is quite a decent range for the 'average' shooter.

All taken with the 70-300. Straight out of the camera, with neutral in camera settings. All handheld.

IIRC, all the car shots were below 200mm

i'd save your money and get the 55-250mm...autofocus speed is about the same...save a little more money...like another $300 or so...and then upgrade to the sigma 150-500mm...you'll be able to get good shots of things that are a lot farther away with that

+1 for the new Tamron 70-300 vc. I have the 55-250 now, I was happy with, but I wanted more. I tried out a few diff lenses, most were too heavy (bigma) or not enough reach (70-200 2.8, and heavy) So I decided to go with the tamron, has great features, awesome price, and really good looking specs. I ordered mine a few weeks ago and you can get an extra % back using ebates depending on where you order from. Here is the link http://www.ebates.com …chS%2FEnIUldnyu​oXSA%3D%3D Good luck.

bmwcolin wrote in post #10930799
+1 for the new Tamron 70-300 vc. I have the 55-250 now, I was happy with, but I wanted more. I tried out a few diff lenses, most were too heavy (bigma) or not enough reach (70-200 2.8, and heavy) So I decided to go with the tamron, has great features, awesome price, and really good looking specs. I ordered mine a few weeks ago and you can get an extra % back using ebates depending on where you order from. Here is the link http://www.ebates.com …chS%2FEnIUldnyu​oXSA%3D%3D Good luck.

how does it compare directly to the 55-250mm...i was wondering if it really outperformed it all that much...you're the first person i've seen that has it

man I didn't think this would be such a hard decision.
Not quite sure what to do now. I really would like to get good zoom range but I don't want to settle to much or break the bank. Oh the decisions

You have some good examples of the 70-300 on this thread. My shots are without any sharpening or PP, whatsoever.

If guys with experience with the 55-250 tell you they know that it's close to the IQ of the 70-300, then you'll have a good idea that it's a decent lens, at a great price.

It's always tough (IMO) to commit to choosing a lens without questioning yourself.

Always remember that you can sell your lens, and not lose a ton of dough. Look at it like a really looooong rental.... lol

Good luck.

.